Taiwan removed from rights Web site
　

TAIWAN WATCHLESS: The nation was listed by Human Rights Watch for several years, but was removed as allegations of human rights violations began to surface
　

By J. Michael Cole and Jenny W. Hsu
STAFF REPORTERS
Sunday, Dec 28, 2008, Page 1

Last month Taiwan was removed from the list of countries appearing on the Web site of the New York-based organization Human Rights Watch. Prior to the removal, Taiwan had appeared under the “Asia” rubric of the site. At present, 23 countries are listed in the “Asia” section, with China and Tibet appearing under the same head.

Other prominent rights organizations, including Amnesty International and Reporters Without Borders, continue to monitor Taiwan and have in recent weeks published reports on such matters as excessive use of force by police and threats to the independence of the media.

Human Rights Watch wrote on its Web site that: “In assessing trouble spots, we take into consideration the severity of the crimes being committed, the numbers of those affected and our potential to have impact.”

Taiwan has been listed throughout the 2000s, although reports of human rights violations were scarce. Its removal coincided with warnings by rights watchdogs, religious organizations, non-profit organizations, academics and various governments of possible human rights violations by the Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) administration.

Requests from the Taipei Times for comment by Human Rights Watch on the removal have not been answered.

In related news, Taiwan was found listed as “Taipei China” on the World Organization for Animal Health’s (OIE) Web site for its newsletter subscription registration form.

Contacted by the Taipei Times for comment, a Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) official yesterday said Taiwan’s rights in the OIE were not in jeopardy despite the use of “Taipei China” in the country listing for registration on its Web site.

MOFA officials said it was aware of the use of “Taipei China” on the OIE’s Web site and had been working with the group to change it.

The ministry would look into why the country listing in the registration form had not been changed and would inform the OIE about it, officials said.

On the rest of the OIE Web site, Taiwan, one of the 172 members, is listed as Taipei (Chinese). It also uses “Chinese Taipei” in the section pertaining to animal-related diseases in different regions.

MOFA Deputy Spokesman James Chang (章司平) yesterday said it was a technical issue because the group probably had not had time to change all references to “Chinese Taipei.”

Taiwan was admitted to the OIE in 1954 under the name “The Republic of China (Taiwan)” but was later forced to change its designation to “Taipei China” after the People’s Republic of China (PRC) became an official member in 1992.

Last year, Taiwan’s OIE membership name was changed again to “Chinese Taipei.”

Chang said Taiwan agreed to the new moniker in an effort to “cooperate with other member-countries” for the sake of animal health issues.

However, when the change was made last year, the foreign ministry under the Democratic Progressive Party administration lodged a protest against the Paris-based group, saying the change was a political maneuver by Beijing to sabotage Taiwan’s international status.

Last year, Beijing not only urged the OIE to change Taiwan’s designation to “Taiwan, China”— saying that the PRC was the sole legal government representative of China, including Taiwan. It also proposed to downgrade Taiwan’s status from a full member to a “non-sovereign regional member.”

After intervention from the US and the EU, it was decided to change Taiwan’s membership name to “Chinese Taipei” but the downgrade proposal was implemented.

US watches Pakistan troop movements with concern

AP, WASHINGTON AND ISLAMABAD
Sunday, Dec 28, 2008, Page 1

Pakistan told India yesterday it did not want war and would use force only if attacked — a move apparently aimed at reducing tensions amid reports indicating thousands of Pakistani troops were headed for their shared border.

“We don’t want to fight, we don’t want to have war, we don’t want to have aggression with our neighbors,” Pakistani Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani said in a televised speech.

Still, Gilani said the country’s military was “fully prepared” to respond to any Indian aggression.

Pakistan’s latest moves were seen as an indication that it will retaliate if India launches air or missile strikes against militant targets on Pakistani soil — rather than a signal that a fourth war between the two countries was imminent.

US officials watched with growing concern on Friday as reports suggested Pakistan was massing troops to the India border. Such a move raises double-barreled worries: A possible confrontation between two nuclear powers and a shift by the Pakistani military away from battling the Taliban along its western Afghan edge.

“We hope that both sides will avoid taking steps that will unnecessarily raise tensions during these already tense times,” White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe said.

US military leaders have been urging both India and Pakistan to exercise restraint in the wake of the deadly Mumbai attacks that many believe were originated by Pakistan-based militants.

On Friday, US intelligence and military officials were still trying to determine if the reported troop movements were true, and, if so, what Pakistan’s intent may be. They cautioned that the reports may be exaggerated, aimed more at delivering a message than dispatching forces.

Officials spoke on condition of anonymity as they were not authorized to discuss intelligence matters.

US defense leaders have been worried about a new flare-up between Pakistan and India ever since the coordinated terror attacks in India’s financial capital last month that killed 164 people.

India has demanded that Pakistan arrest the perpetrators behind the Mumbai attacks. It says they are members of Lashkar-e-Taiba, a militant group widely believed to have been created by Pakistani intelligence in the 1980s and used to fight Indian-rule in the disputed Kashmir region.

Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, was in Pakistan twice this month and as many as seven times in the past year. In recent meetings with senior Pakistani leaders he has urged restraint and encouraged both sides to find ways to work together.

One senior military official said on Friday that the US is monitoring the issue, but still could not confirm assertions from Pakistani intelligence officials that some 20,000 troops were on the move, heading to the Indian border.

A key concern for US officials is that some of those troops may have been stationed along the volatile Afghan border and were being diverted to the Indian side.

US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Mullen, who have both been in the region in recent weeks, have expressed the hope that Pakistan would stay focused on fighting militants in its mountainous northwestern Federally Administered Tribal Areas.

Insurgents there have proved increasingly troublesome, launching attacks into Afghanistan, disrupting supply routes for the Afghan, US and coalition militaries, and providing training and hiding places for the Taliban, al-Qaeda and others. It also has long been suspected that al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden has been hiding there.

Senior defense officials said the US is watching the situation very closely since officials would prefer that the Pakistanis remain focused on battling insurgents within their own country.

Taiwan removed from rights Web site
　

TAIWAN WATCHLESS: The nation was listed by Human Rights Watch for several years, but was removed as allegations of human rights violations began to surface
　

By J. Michael Cole and Jenny W. Hsu
STAFF REPORTERS
Sunday, Dec 28, 2008, Page 1

Last month Taiwan was removed from the list of countries appearing on the Web site of the New York-based organization Human Rights Watch. Prior to the removal, Taiwan had appeared under the “Asia” rubric of the site. At present, 23 countries are listed in the “Asia” section, with China and Tibet appearing under the same head.

Other prominent rights organizations, including Amnesty International and Reporters Without Borders, continue to monitor Taiwan and have in recent weeks published reports on such matters as excessive use of force by police and threats to the independence of the media.

Human Rights Watch wrote on its Web site that: “In assessing trouble spots, we take into consideration the severity of the crimes being committed, the numbers of those affected and our potential to have impact.”

Taiwan has been listed throughout the 2000s, although reports of human rights violations were scarce. Its removal coincided with warnings by rights watchdogs, religious organizations, non-profit organizations, academics and various governments of possible human rights violations by the Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) administration.

Requests from the Taipei Times for comment by Human Rights Watch on the removal have not been answered.

In related news, Taiwan was found listed as “Taipei China” on the World Organization for Animal Health’s (OIE) Web site for its newsletter subscription registration form.

Contacted by the Taipei Times for comment, a Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) official yesterday said Taiwan’s rights in the OIE were not in jeopardy despite the use of “Taipei China” in the country listing for registration on its Web site.

MOFA officials said it was aware of the use of “Taipei China” on the OIE’s Web site and had been working with the group to change it.

The ministry would look into why the country listing in the registration form had not been changed and would inform the OIE about it, officials said.

On the rest of the OIE Web site, Taiwan, one of the 172 members, is listed as Taipei (Chinese). It also uses “Chinese Taipei” in the section pertaining to animal-related diseases in different regions.

MOFA Deputy Spokesman James Chang (章司平) yesterday said it was a technical issue because the group probably had not had time to change all references to “Chinese Taipei.”

Taiwan was admitted to the OIE in 1954 under the name “The Republic of China (Taiwan)” but was later forced to change its designation to “Taipei China” after the People’s Republic of China (PRC) became an official member in 1992.

Last year, Taiwan’s OIE membership name was changed again to “Chinese Taipei.”

Chang said Taiwan agreed to the new moniker in an effort to “cooperate with other member-countries” for the sake of animal health issues.

However, when the change was made last year, the foreign ministry under the Democratic Progressive Party administration lodged a protest against the Paris-based group, saying the change was a political maneuver by Beijing to sabotage Taiwan’s international status.

Last year, Beijing not only urged the OIE to change Taiwan’s designation to “Taiwan, China”— saying that the PRC was the sole legal government representative of China, including Taiwan. It also proposed to downgrade Taiwan’s status from a full member to a “non-sovereign regional member.”

After intervention from the US and the EU, it was decided to change Taiwan’s membership name to “Chinese Taipei” but the downgrade proposal was implemented.

Chinese spouses protest lack of human, civil rights

STAFF WRITER, WITH CNA
Sunday, Dec 28, 2008, Page 3
　

More than 40 Chinese spouses, the Alliance for Human Rights Legislation for Immigrants and Migrants (AHRLIM), the Awakening Foundation and other organizations demonstrated yesterday outside the Taipei Guest House, saying that a lack of human rights and domestic and marriage legislation were turning them into second-class citizens.

They demanded that the Act Governing Relations between Peoples of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area (台灣地區與大陸地區人民關係條例) be amended so they could enjoy the same human rights as other foreign spouses.

Tseng Chao-yuan (曾昭媛), Awakening Foundation secretary-general, said there were about 98,000 Chinese spouses residing in Taiwan, but that they have to wait for 10 years before they can obtain citizenship, unlike other foreign spouses who are eligible after four years.

Hsia Hsiao-chuan (夏曉鵑), associate professor in Shih Hsin University’s Graduate Institute for Social Transformation Studies, said that although Taiwan was a country that respected human rights, Chinese spouses were discriminated against. adding that international conventions on women’s rights state that foreign spouses should enjoy basic human rights protection in their new country.

Zheng Xiaowen (鄭曉文), who has lived in Taiwan for five years, said that many Chinese spouses experienced economic problems, because they do not have the right to work, which means if their spouse dies and they have no children, or if they divorce because of domestic violence, the Chinese spouse has to return to China.

KMT offers more debt, not hope
　

By Frank hsieh 謝長廷
Sunday, Dec 28, 2008, Page 8

On Tuesday, the Taiwan Confederation of Trade Unions (TCTU) organized a demonstration at the Council of Labor Affairs to protest against companies forcing workers to take unpaid leave, a practice that the TCTU says violates labor laws.

The demonstration is over, but the economic downturn continues. Although the economic crisis is global, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and his administration have prolonged the crisis and made it more difficult to end the economic downturn domestically by employing hardline, centralized policies.

With the domestic unemployment rate reaching 4.64 percent last month, we must wonder whether Ma’s economic policies will increase employment.

The reality is that capitalists have a certain amount of political influence, and that could easily restrict the direction of national policy.

When the government bails out capitalists with its limited financial resources and hands out consumer vouchers with clear overtones of vote-buying, this takes resources from national relief funds for education, cultural and social activities and environmental protection, making these sectors the biggest losers in the economic downturn.

In addition to providing financial assistance to capitalists, the government will issue consumer vouchers for every citizen and has mapped out plans to save the property and stock markets.

Where will all this money come from? Will the public have to shoulder the financial burden or will the government impose higher taxes on the companies that benefit from the bailout?

The first answer that comes to mind is, of course, tax hikes.

But the legislature has never managed to pass a bill to raise taxes, except for the alternative minimum tax bill proposed by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) in 2005, which required every rich person and profitable enterprise to pay a certain amount in taxes, leading to an annual increase of nearly NT$20 billion (US$606 million) in tax revenues.

All other tax bills proposed relaxing the requirements for tax exemptions or breaks.

If the total of available resources doesn’t increase, it is impossible to increase social welfare spending. Where is the government supposed to find the extra resources?

Since it is difficult to impose higher taxes on companies, the government will have to take on debt, but this burden will be shared by the public and is unfair to future generations. We must keep in mind that 70 percent of tax revenues come from wage earners.

It is most irresponsible for the government to expand its debts — especially unproductive, non-capital debts, of which the consumer vouchers are a prime example.

This scheme would have been voted down in many countries because it is politically, not economically, motivated.

If the government had used the nearly NT$90 billion designated for the consumer voucher plan to hire 300,000 people at a monthly salary of NT$30,000 a year, the unemployment rate would decrease, which would stimulate consumer spending.

Now the biggest problem is that the public suffering from the economic meltdown sees no hope.

What does national vision mean? It means that the government should protect public welfare and property and establish a beautiful, clean, sustainable, just and fair living environment, in which lives are respected and talent is fostered.

The global financial turmoil has adversely affected the nation’s economy and many suffer from unemployment and rising commodity prices. But is there hope? We don’t expect the government to realize this vision in four or eight years, but at least it should lead us toward this vision and happiness.

If the government continues its current policies, the GDP will have risen by at most 5 percentage points three years from now, which is less than under the previous government.

Where is our hope when national sovereignty is under attack, national debt is exploding, social order is destroyed and the gap between rich and poor is expanding? What is the value of enduring such hardships?

Frank Hsieh is founder of Taiwan Shadow Government, an NGO.